The Vermont
legislature, when considering whether or not to allow Vermont Yankee
to operate for another twenty years past its original license, was
not permitted to consider safety issues. The people of Vermont,
however, are under no such restriction. In fact, we must scrutinize
the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which is in charge of
reactor safety, to know if we should trust their actions and
judgements.

The NRC's record
does not inspire confidence. In spite of serious leaks, near
meltdowns, non-compliance with regulations, and false testimony by
reactor owners and operators, the NRC has approved every single
application for reactor re-licensing that has been requested. In the
aftermath of the continuing Fukushima meltdown, regulators in
countries across the globe are re-assessing or suspending their
nuclear programs. They recognize that the disaster in Japan is an
indication that the best laid plans can go awry, and they want to be
sure that their nations don't experience the same catastrophe through
the complacency of regulators. But in America, president Obama,
without knowing the extent of the reactor damage in Japan, without
having a clue about how much radiation was rising into the atmosphere
or pouring into the oceans, stood in front of the cameras to boldly
(and erroneously) say that no radiation would reach our shores. And
his NRC proceeded to blithely issue a license renewal to Vermont
Yankee, a virtual twin to the Fukushima reactor, without so much as a
pause to consider the implications of the disaster and how we could
prevent one here. Instead they relied upon the same boiler plate
statements they have always used, intoning that the reactor design
took natural disasters into consideration and that, besides, no
tsunami would ever hit Vernon. (Did anyone tell them about the
hurricane and flood of 1927?)

- Advertisement -

Indeed, at a recent
hearing in Brattleboro, when asked a direct question about how the
pool of spent fuel rods, suspended six stories above the ground
protected by sheet metal, should be expected to withstand a direct
hit of an F4 tornado like the one that recently devastated brick and
stone buildings in nearby Springfield MA, NRC representatives
responded only by saying that it has been designed to withstand
natural disasters, including the fuel pool. And when a chorus of
exasperated voices demanded to know how, they were answered with a
shrug. Considering that there is more highly radioactive spent fuel
at VY than there is at all of the Fukishima reactors put together,
this is unsettling at the very least.

Then consider the
chief resident inspector at VY, Dave Bingard. He came to the NRC
directly from working for Entergy at the Fitzpatrick reactor in New
York. Within three years, he became the inspector of the reactor
operated by his former employer. This doesn't mean that he will
nefariously work in Entergy's favor. But in order to question or
criticize any of Entergy's practices, he would have to reject the
very procedures and policies that he himself had been a part of
during his Entergy years. The revolving door culture that is
destroying the efficacy of our Congress, does no better to instill
confidence in regulators of the safety of our nuclear reactors.

- Advertisement -

Then we can consider
the statements and actions of the NRC. When VY license renewal was
approved by the NRC, chairman Gregory Jazco explicitly stated that
this did not preclude Vermont from the process, and that NRC approval
was just one step for Entergy. This was echoed at the Brattleboro
hearing by the NRC regional commissioner as well, where he stated
that Vermont's actions "don't involve any of our authorities or
responsibilities". However, according to Bernie Sanders, the NRC
proceeded to meet with Entergy lawyers, then voted to ask the Justice
department to intervene in the court case on Entergy's behalf. The
NRC, illuminating the Obama administration's commitment to open
government and transparency, refused to answer the Senator's charge.
Why are they willing to act in secrecy and take their lumps from the
public? One might posit that if they revealed their actions, we would
be even more outraged. Unfortunately, we cannot really know. And this
is precisely why, until they change their procedures and
accountability, we have no choice but to question validity of NRC
rulings about safety. They have worked hand in glove with the nuclear
industry for decades while we will have to live with the aftermath of
their mistakes. While we cannot pretend to answer these safety
questions for ourselves, it would be the height of irresponsibility
if we were to trust the NRC implicitly.

We need only
remember George W. Bush's claim that no one expected the levees in
New Orleans to fail during hurricane Katrina to realize the
consequences of complacency.When all we hear are unsubstantiated
statements telling us not to worry, its time to start worrying.